The Canadian newspaper the Toronto Star seems to have a balanced article describing Y2K readiness in that country. Wanna bet the Doom Zombies here won't like it?

Relax! Y2K bug won't be so cyber bad after all

By Robert Cribb
Toronto Star Business Reporter

The end may not be nigh after all.

If you believe most experts, all the hype, biblical allusions, rekindled survivalism and pop culture paranoia surrounding the Y2K computer bug will seem overzealous six months from now when the information age's day of reckoning - Jan. 1, 2000 - arrives.

No global economic implosion. No falling elevators. No plunging airplanes.

But even the most optimistic Y2K watchers admit that life on the cusp of a new century won't be any cyber paradise either. At its heart, all that techno-induced anxiety has some justification, they say.

``The end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it scenarios are no longer viable,'' says Peter de Jager, a Brampton-based Y2K guru whose early doomsaying on the computer bug has become decidedly less ominous of late. ``But that's not to say we won't have problems. They're inevitable.''

And some industry experts say Canadian municipalities and health-care sectors are still a Y2K mystery.

``My sense is that health care is between 40 and 60 per cent (Y2K compliant) and that's cutting it pretty close,'' said Gaylen Duncan, president of the Information Technology Association of Canada.

The so-called millennium bug was born in IBM mainframe computers decades ago, when computer hardware and software programmers decided to save space and time by using only the final two digits of a year to represent the date. That opened the door for 2000, or ``00,'' to be interpreted as 1900 by millions of computers.

And out of that simple business decision we now have a global technology problem whose solution is expected to cost well over $1 trillion.

Companies and governments were slow to respond to the looming cyber crisis, but a growing sense of urgency has inspired full-fledged dedication to the Y2K fix over the past year in many office towers.

A recent Statistics Canada study reported 95 per cent of Canadian organizations are tackling the Year 2000 bug. And with less than 200 days to go, those organizations are quick to reassure the public that all systems are go for the turn of the century.

On Monday, Toronto Hydro added its calming voice to the good news Y2K choir.

``We want to assure people that there will be the same reliability on Jan. 1 as there is today,'' said Connie Woo, Toronto Hydro's chief information officer, who's in charge of the utility's $6 million preparedness effort. ``We're confident our critical systems are ready.''

The Canadian Securities Administrators, Canadian Council of Grocery Distributors, the Food and Consumer Products Manufacturers of Canada and the Canadian Bankers Association have also issued statements expressing confidence that their computer systems will withstand the change of date.

Corporate annual reports released over the next few months are also expected to include cheery statements on Y2K readiness. But regulators hope those statements are much more candid than they have been in the past.

In January, the Canadian Securities Administrators reported ``serious inadequacies'' in Y2K disclosure, saying 59 per cent of the companies surveyed provided only the most generic accounting of their Y2K preparedness. Another quarter offered no information at all.

The Ontario Securities Commission has asked several companies that have been stingy with details on their Y2K preparedness to issue restated reports, said spokesperson Mark Conacher.

And that's only the first step the OSC can take against companies that play dumb with their Y2K status.

``It's within the commission's powers to bring proceedings against a company and impose restrictions on a company's officers and directors up to and including a cease trade order,'' he said.

Many Y2K public statements contain a kind of code phrase to quell public fears without getting specific.

Organizations such as Toronto Hydro say their ``critical systems'' are ready for the Y2K bug.

But ``when they say their critical systems are fine, you have to understand they're saying, `We've fixed 20 to 30 per cent of applications in our business,'' said de Jager. ```We didn't get to the other 70 per cent and it will most probably break.'

``Hopefully, they've drawn the line properly so that they chose all the right critical systems to focus on. That's the wild card because they won't have all gotten it right.''

Joe Boivin, a Y2K researcher in Ottawa, said corporate Y2K assurances have to be seen for what they are - carefully worded statements crafted by lawyers to accentuate the positive and say as little as possible about any potential problems.

As rosy as corporate Y2K claims are, they almost never offer any definitive guarantees.

``We can't tell you with 100 per cent certainty that some event, some series of contingencies, may not cause an interruption,'' said Hans Konow, president and chief executive officer of the Canadian Electricity Association.

``We are not doing it because we have anything to hide . . . but simply because you can never guarantee in a system as complex as the electricity system that some unexpected event, weather or otherwise, may not cause some temporary interruption.''

While public hysteria about Y2K has been tempered in recent months, a steady flow of disconcerting studies questions that confidence.

The U.S.-based Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board recently reported that the bug could cause ``significant'' problems for plants that process hazardous chemicals, including plant shutdowns and a higher risk of accidents.

-- Y2K Pro (2@641.com), June 22, 1999

Answers

Hey, proton beam, did you even read the article? You call this good news?

-- Spudsey (in@jam.commie), June 22, 1999.

**sigh of relief**

I'm feeling much better after reading this. Why...just look at all those verifiable facts and figures! Look at those rock solid sources! Anybody wanna buy a generator?

-- Don (dwegner@cheyenneweb.com), June 22, 1999.

http://www.canoe.com/TechNews9906/01_y2k.html

[snip]

Tuesday, June 1, 1999

Private and public sector slipping on Y2K

By JENNIFER DITCHBURN -- The Canadian Press

OTTAWA (CP) -- Canadian businesses and governments are having trouble meeting self-imposed deadlines to ready their computers for the year 2000, says a new federal report.

The Commons industry committee singled out slippage on Y2K remediation plans as one of the biggest problems facing Canada's efforts to beat the bug.

Delays in many industries could cause major disruptions, the committee said.

Some of the dozens of witnesses that appeared before the committee admitted they were being thrown off schedule because of unforeseen problems, such as finding imbedded computer chips unexpectedly and having to check them out.

"We're just concerned that some of the large companies that were leading the pack have come forward and say their dates are delayed by three or four months," said committee chairwoman Susan Whelan.

"We know there are other companies out there that haven't set a date, so we're a little concerned that some of them need to get right on track right now."

The MPs recommended that more be done to encourage organizations to keep up their efforts.

It also urged Ottawa to engage in a little slippage of its own, by extending the deadline on a tax break offered to businesses that need to replace their computers and software to deal with the year 2000 problem.

For the first time, the committee also examined the voluntary sector, composed of approximately 175,000 organizations.

It found that non-profit agencies are at a distinct disadvantage because they lack the financial and human resources to fix computer equipment that is often outdated and more glitch-prone.

"Financially it's always an issue when you have to take 286s, 386s, and 486s and make them 2000 compatible," said Joanne Cooper, executive director of the Volunteer Centre of Toronto.

"It means you have to buy new equipment and there's no money in the system to pay for that."

The non-profit sector is not eligible for year 2000-related tax breaks, but the committee is recommending that federal and provincial governments make more resources available to them.

The industry committee has been one of the only agencies consistently monitoring the country's progress on the year 2000 issue and making its findings public.

It has repeatedly pointed to the health sector as a cause of concern. Statistics Canada recently reported that only 42 per cent of hospitals and care homes expect to have all their critical systems ready by August.

Witnesses told MPs that part of the problem with tackling the millennium bug is compiling information on all the diverse elements of the health-care sector, then sharing a small pool of skilled computer consultants.

The committee also identified stockpiling of medical supplies and pharmaceuticals as a potential problem, since health-care organizations and consumers alike could contribute to shortages.

It recommended the federal government decide whether it should engage in stockpiling itself, and if yes, determine a policy for allocating the products.

[snip]

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), June 22, 1999.

"Companies and governments were slow to respond to the looming cyber crisis, but a growing sense of urgency has inspired full-fledged dedication to the Y2K fix over the past year in many office towers."

Thanks to people like Ed Yourdon and Gary North. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), June 22, 1999.

Hey Jethro,

Sorry, got two of my own ; ) I might be interested in one of those ICBM silos in your backyard, but you got to get rid of the ICBM first.

Say HI to Zog for me,

-- CT (ct@no.yr), June 22, 1999.

Is that the charming Gary "gays should be executed" North you are referring to?

"So, of course I want to see y2k bring down the system, all over the world. I have hoped for this all of my adult life." -- Gary North

-- Y2K Pro (2@641.com), June 22, 1999.

I gotta agree with "Spudsy"

You Call This Good News...???

Then what, exactly, would be bad news?

Hrumph...!

"that's not to say we won't have problems. They're inevitable" DeJager has spoken...!

-- M.Moth (Derigueur2@aol.com), June 22, 1999.

It is the calm and soothing assurance from highly placed government and private sector officials that scares the crap out of me. How about you?

-- Barry (barryjaynes@usenvitech.com), June 22, 1999.

Y2K Pro,

Zombie: supernatural power held to enter a dead body and bring it back to life. So, maybe you're right. We do have supernatural powers around here, lots of them. We do see a lot of deaths coming at us, the biggest one of all being the social system as we know it. We are ready to enter into the dying system and bring it back to life, in a new and better form. So yeh, I guess you have us pegged. I only wish your group had that much dedication and concern for the big picture and other people. Oh, and beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so that posting you think is beautiful is only beautiful to you. Too bad.

-- Gordon (gpconnolly@aol.com), June 22, 1999.

"But even the most optimistic Y2K watchers admit that life on the cusp of a new century won't be any cyber paradise either. At its heart, all that techno-induced anxiety has some justification, they say".

<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>

``But that's not to say we won't have problems. They're inevitable.''

<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>

And some industry experts say Canadian municipalities and health-care sectors are still a Y2K mystery.

<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>

"Companies and governments were slow to respond to the looming cyber crisis, but a growing sense of urgency has inspired full-fledged dedication to the Y2K fix over the past year in many office towers".

<<<<<< a growing sense of urgency has inspired my dedication to notice Y2k CADETS fiath in something so vague>>>>>>>>>>

"A recent Statistics Canada study reported 95 per cent of Canadian organizations are tackling the Year 2000 bug".

<<<<<<>>>>>>>>

"But regulators hope those statements are much more candid than they have been in the past".

<<<<<<<< Y2k CADET better hope my statement isn't more candid>>>>>>>

"In January, the Canadian Securities Administrators reported ``serious inadequacies'' in Y2K disclosure, saying 59 per cent of the companies surveyed provided only the most generic accounting of their Y2K preparedness. Another quarter offered no information at all".

<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>

"But ``when they say their critical systems are fine, you have to understand they're saying, `We've fixed 20 to 30 per cent of applications in our business,'' said de Jager. ```We didn't get to the other 70 per cent and it will most probably break".'

<<<<<<<<20-30% of Y2K CADETS brain is there (the reptilian part) but where is the other 70% >>>>>>>>>>>

``"Hopefully, they've drawn the line properly so that they chose all the right critical systems to focus on.That's the wild card because they won't have all gotten it right".'' <<<<<<>>>>>

"As rosy as corporate Y2K claims are, they almost never offer any definitive guarantees".

<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>

"We are not doing it because we have anything to hide . . . but simply because you can never guarantee in a system as complex as the electricity system that some unexpected event, weather or otherwise, may not cause some temporary interruption".

<<<<<<<>>>>>

"The U.S.-based Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board recently reported that the bug could cause ``significant'' problems for plants that process hazardous chemicals, including plant shutdowns and a higher risk of accidents".

<<<<<<<< I see a significant amount of scanning Y2K CADET is doing when he reads these articles. He reads the title and feels confident he can throw a punch. I suggest you spend more time reading. You and a few others are flys in the ointment, sticker burrs in the side, a waste of time reading, PERIOD. I can see why censure has your name at the top of the list.>>>>>>>>>>>

shaking head, rolling eyes....what a wierd backwards world we live in.

-- Feller. (feller@wanna.help), June 22, 1999.

SOUNDS LIKE A BUNCH>OF FRIGHTENED OSTRICHES--trying to convince other frightened-ostriches.=lack of sand to bury head-in??>OR how on earth could our god of technology-possibly-fail us??WHAT-ABOUT-OUR-MONEY?? WE,VE BEEN SOooo COMFORTABLE FOR SO-LONG. what do those wierd christians mean by-TRUE-values.

-- al-d. (CATT@ZIANET.COM), June 22, 1999.

Wierd Christians? Hypocrites sink their own ships with loose lips!

-- Feller (feller@wanna.help), June 22, 1999.

Y2K Pro,

I typically ignore you, because you usually don't have anything useful to say. But it is so obvious after reading this article that you are grasping at straws that I had to respond.

You obviously did one of two things: (1) you either read ONLY the title, and not the article itself, or (2) you are so intent on seeing ONLY good news that your tunnel vision caused you to ignore the more alarming parts of the article.

I have a suggestion, Y2K Pro. Why don't you reread the article and explain to me how the following items are GOOD news:

"...health care [in Canada] is between 40 and 60 per cent (Y2K compliant)..." This is now JUNE 1999, btw.

"In January, the Canadian Securities Administrators reported 'serious inadequacies' in Y2K disclosure, saying 59 per cent of the companies surveyed provided only the most generic accounting of their Y2K preparedness. Another quarter offered no information at all."

"Organizations such as Toronto Hydro say their ``critical systems'' are ready for the Y2K bug.
But 'when they say their critical systems are fine, you have to understand they're saying, "We've fixed 20 to 30 per cent of applications in our business," said de Jager. " 'We didn't get to the other 70 per cent and it will most probably break.' "
"Hopefully, they've drawn the line properly so that they chose all the right critical systems to focus on. That's the wild card because they won't have all gotten it right."

"While public hysteria about Y2K has been tempered in recent months, a steady flow of disconcerting studies questions that confidence.
The U.S.-based Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board recently reported that the bug could cause 'significant' problems for plants that process hazardous chemicals, including plant shutdowns and a higher risk of accidents."

I anxiously await your rational for considering these items GOOD news.

-- Nabi Davidson (nabi7@yahoo.com), June 22, 1999.

** CT **

Rest assured, my friend, that the higher-ups within the "Third Way" are working on it. Your silo should be ready soon. ;)

-- Don (dwegner@cheyenneweb.com), June 22, 1999.

Y2K Pro- If you think this is "good" news, it must be slim pickings out there. My daughter is also "confident" the tooth fairy exists. Come on dude, time to GI.

-- Gia (Laureltree7@hotmail.com), June 22, 1999.

"While public hysteria about Y2K has been tempered in recent months, a steady flow of disconcerting studies questions that confidence.

What hysteria? What Panic?

I keep on seeing these words and don't Get It, there is no panic or hysteria! John Q and Joe 6 pack haven't heard a word about Y2k, Suzy homemaker and the average GI Jane ( super Mom ) haven't heard, or paid attention to Y2k. What hysteria?

The only Panic I've seen is with new GI's, they pace, curse, and Go " what am I gunna do? "

Then after a few words, they get down to prepin'. Around here it's easy, Water, water every where, and every drop you can drink. Year round Veegies from the greenhouse, and all the fish and game you can trap, shoot, or catch.

Summer time, And the livein' is easy. Fish are jumpin', And the livin' is high.

Location, Location, Location!

-- CT (ct@no.yr), June 22, 1999.

Jethro,

I'd rather see you move a little West than wait for my silo ; )

Blue on black, Ash on a fire, Cold on ice, A dead mans touch,

Wisper or a scream, Dosen't mean a thing, Won't bring you back,

E me, I've lost touch with Z, is he " home " yet?

-- CT (ct@no.yr), June 22, 1999.

Y2K Pro,

Thanks for showing up today with your quote from GN. I hope tomorrow you will be back with EY quote. You sure are a funny boy/girl but I am starting to like you. It is so nice of you to offer yourself as the whipping boy for the pollies. I hope you have a sunny summer.

P.S. Have another donut.

-- SgtSchultz (SgtHansSchultz@Stalag13.com), June 22, 1999.

Hey, Y2K Pro, How about sharing some of that shit you must be smoking?

-- Daryll (twinck@wfeca.net), June 22, 1999.

Y2K-probed, put me down as a member of GN's "let's hope the current system is brought down" club. I would much prefer the U.S. Constitution and the vision the Founding Fathers had (especially T. Jefferson) to what has come to oppress us. We live under more rules and more taxes than they revolted against in the 1770's...

-- MinnesotaSmith (y2ksafeminnesota@hotmail.com), June 22, 1999.

Ya gotta love Doom Zombies, especially those that are engineers on the train of fear. I said "The Canadian newspaper the Toronto Star seems to have a balanced article describing Y2K readiness in that country. Wanna bet the Doom Zombies here won't like it?

I didn't say it was good news. I said it was balanced, i.e. some good some not. I also said that the doofus crowd wouldn't like it - I was right.

-- Y2K Pro (2@641.com), June 22, 1999.

Interesting choice of balance.

``We are not doing it because we have anything to hide . . . but simply because you can never guarantee in a system as complex as the electricity system that some unexpected event, weather or otherwise, may not cause some temporary interruption.''

What's that song... Find 100 ways? To define "unexpected" or "no guarantees" or "temporary."

Confidence building, huh? Go back to sleep now.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), June 22, 1999.

I know it is a difficult concept for a Doomer to understand, but for service providers such as utilities, the word LIABILITY looms large.

Your local electric company will not guarantee you that you will receive service tomorrow. Why not? Now put your little Doomer mind to the task. Why no guarantees? While you are thinking, write down the word "liability." Keep thinking. I'm sure you'll come up with the answer. Or not...

-- Y2K Pro (2@641.com), June 22, 1999.

Hey Pro,

Time to get a new handle don't you think?

I liked the article so you were wrong. I liked it so much I'm heading for Sam's tonight. Thanks.

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), June 22, 1999.

Give it up pro, your spankin a dead monkey.

-- FLAME AWAY (BLehman202@aol.com), June 22, 1999.

I beg your pardon! Diane J. Squire may be a witless doomer, but I would never call her a "dead monkey". Surely you will be censored for this...

-- Y2K Pro (2@641.com), June 22, 1999.

Hey Y2K CADET: What the article (it doesn't require much brain power) did was kept you in the dark. How you can use such an ambiguous article for ammunition makes no sense. What IS ANNOYING is the ploy of yours. Black and white allows contrast. When you can provide a broad sweeping article that isn't grey and sheds light on successful remediation, do it. It is annoying to beat around the bush that has no form. This Article is a prome example of that. When you've become a PRO, let us know Y2K CADET.

-- Feller (feller@wanna.help), June 22, 1999.

Listen well y2k amateur: If "LIABILITY" is what you want to talk about, why don't you shut up and read the thread above:

"Institute of Electrical/Electronic Engineers (IEEE) deposition on LIABILITY issues before the US Senate"

I hope you read it better than the Toronoto Star piece you moron.

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), June 22, 1999.

George, you fart-catching, fraidy-cat Doomer. Where exactly is Toronoto?

-- Y2K Pro (2@641.com), June 22, 1999.

Y2K Pro... searching for balanced Y2K newz. Or not. Sees just what he wants to see.

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), June 22, 1999.

LOL Diane

I think what Y2K Propecia is telling us is that he's coming out. Closet doomer eh bud?

Next thing you know, Buddy will be telling us y2k won't have a positive effect...

-- a (a@a.a), June 22, 1999.

Pro,

I heard Milne was lurking around here. Better hope he don't see this. LOL Diane.

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), June 22, 1999.

Hey amateur-moron, just find 'Toronoto' up your ass!!

-- Georgie Porgie up your ass (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), June 22, 1999.

Here's something else to give balance to the issue:

LINK

-- Sandmann (Sandmann@alasbab.com), June 23, 1999.

Y2k Pro, please refer to my posting concerning the NCC (UK) y2k survey, I would say this is very bad news indeed

(It s a professional industry survey, not tripe written by a newspaper)

-- dick of the dale (rdale@coyet.com), June 23, 1999.

Thanks for that link, Sandmann.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), June 23, 1999.

Give it up Y2K Pro, you're trying to talk to a bunch of dimwits, twits, nut cases, and of course angels.

-- none (none@none.none), June 23, 1999.